Take your logical thinking elsewhere kind sir.
These people are trying to say all gun owners are nuts, not some people are nuts AND own guns.

That is bullcrud. No one is saying all gun owners are not responsible, they are saying not everyone should own one unless they are deemed safe enough to do so. Just like you must pass a theory and a practical driving test and pay a very large amount in insurance to drive a car.

Unless there are specific signs that it is otherwise, it is legal to use another person's driveway to turn around. Lingering is another matter, but simply turning around falls under implied consent.

I like to just sit on my front porch and wait for people to accidentally pull into my driveway so I can shoot them in the face. Its pretty cool that the law says I am in the right on this one. On New Years Eve alone I must get to shoot like 20 people in the face this way.

Take your logical thinking elsewhere kind sir.
These people are trying to say all gun owners are nuts, not some people are nuts AND own guns.

I am a responsible and law abiding citizen. I think it's time for me to own tanks, fighter jets, hire mercenaries and build homemade bombs and have a small country sized arsenal. I should be free to spend money however I wish and so should anyone with money.

Why aren't we selling nuclear warheads? That thing will ensure world peace. Not to mention it'll bring us out of debt very fast.

their moving their table over their
they're moving they're table over they're
there moving there table over there

UK, France, United States, Russia & China have nuclear bombs & you still feel safe because you know they will not nuke randomly like crazy. Some wacko states like Pakistan & North Korea have nuclear weapons, too! But they are just threatening to not get overthrown. So there is a nuclear weapon regulation, you cannot get a nuclear weapon so easily, that is why only a few countries have them. Iran insists on the right to have nuclear technology (to achieve a good power infrastructure, but one or two bombs to threat a little bit would not be so bad). So why not spread the nuclear technology all over the world and maybe sell nuclear bombs, too? I mean, who can deny you the right to have nuclear bombs? A bomb is not killing people, in the end people are the killers, so there is nothing wrong with the bombs! Most countries still would not be a threat but you just have to wait for some wacko to actually use them which is much more possible if everyone has those bombs.

So, nuclear bomb regulation is totally fine ("LOL, DON'T LET WACKO STATES GET THE DREADFUL BOMB") but gun regulation is libertarian bullshit ("LOL, EVERYONE HAS THE RIGHT TO HAVE A WEAPON").

An interesting argument, unfortunately I believe it demonstrates the opposite of the point you are trying to get across. Notice how countries that do not have nuclear capabilities are able to be bullied around by those that do. Now imagine if only 1 country in the world had nuclear power, what do you think would happen if this country was not so benevolent? Nobody would have power to stand against them. This is why I think think gun argument is retarded, if we want to abolish guns, we should abolish ALL guns, including those used by police, governments etc (Obviously this is an impossibility) which is why I think in the end to gain overall safety against a potentially evil force we sacrifice a little personal safety, if you do not fear your government, you are a fool. Where power exists corruption exists. The more power the more corruption.

The true problem exists in the mentality that human life is so worthless (other than your own) and the paranoia that everyone is out to get you. Responsible gun ownership needs to be taught, responsible humanity needs to be taught (unfortunately it has slipped through the cracks lately, with selfishness, apathy, and paranoia ruling the day). Sadly the media fuels this paranoia, apathy, and selfishness by promoting and flaunting every possible error a human can commit. So while something that you should not be scared of (because it almost never happens) suddenly seems the norm and an irrational fear is born, when enough people have this irrational fear it starts to become a realistic fear, and slowly society shifts downward into a cesspool of shit, where indeed people are not capable of being responsible enough to own a weapon (of any type).

Take your logical thinking elsewhere kind sir.
These people are trying to say all gun owners are nuts, not some people are nuts AND own guns.

If you read anything I (the OP) have said, you'd realize your statement is completely false. I've clearly stated I have no issue with gun ownership, but a HUGE issue with the mentality that a lot of people seem to have that it's perfectly fine to shoot people under the most ridiculous circumstances.

Also, this part isn't a reply to you, but about stuff I saw in earlier posts: the headline mentions race, but the race isn't important in the article. It's only brought up, because, well, it's NBClatino, so it's news mostly about/for *gasp* Latinos. I'm Latino, and I didn't think his race was even RELEVANT, which is why I left it out of the title in the thread. The only reason race could have even been an issue is that it probably made the guy more likely to think he was part of one of the gangs, which I think is PERFECTLY REASONABLE (assuming the gangs were, in fact, primarily composed of Latinos), but doesn't even begin to excuse his reaction.

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle
Also, it's should HAVE. NOT "should of". "Should of" doesn't even make sense. If you think you should own a cat, do you say "I should of a cat" or "I should have a cat"? Do you HAVE cats, or do you OF cats?

That is bullcrud. No one is saying all gun owners are not responsible, they are saying not everyone should own one unless they are deemed safe enough to do so. Just like you must pass a theory and a practical driving test and pay a very large amount in insurance to drive a car.

Indeed. I don't get why this is so hard for conservatives to understand. We don't want to fucking ban all guns, we want to make sure the psychopaths can't get their hands on them.

Not every liberal agrees with Fienstein's gun ban proposal ffs.

If a video game developer removed tumors from players, they'd whine about nerfing their loss in weight and access to radiation powers. -Cracked.com